| 摘要: | 在經濟發展上，中國儼然已成為推動世界經濟成長的主要引擎之一，然中國近年的產能過剩及投資環境的矛盾，使得市場疑慮逐漸升起，部分發展成熟的產業遂而轉往找尋下一個鄰近，且具有人口紅利及市場潛力的應許之地。如今，這波由中國外移的產業，除帶動了周邊國家的經濟發展，也造福了如越南、印尼等東南亞諸國，形成了新的領頭龍發展模式。身為受益國之一的越南，在1986年與2000年執行開放開革與頒布新的企業法，吸引了大量的外人投資與本土新進廠商；此後，在2000-2013年，越南經濟成長快速，平均經濟成長率達到6.91%。為瞭解這波新進廠商在越南的區位選擇，生產力成長來源，及越南與中國經濟活動的連動關係，本論文旨在，透過越南、印尼及中國的廠商大數據，經由嚴謹的計量模型，依序地探討越南外人投資等相關經濟議題。
章節二，越南政府在2000年進行改革開放，吸引大量外人投資，提供了一個絕佳的社會實驗機會，讓研究者得以驗證外人投資等相關議題。於此，本章節使用2000至2005年越南的廠商普查資料(General Statistical Office, GSO)，分析外國新進廠商與本地新進廠商在選擇進駐點時，是否會存在物以類聚的現象; 即外國新進廠商(本地新進廠商)，選擇較多外國廠商(本地廠商)的群聚區域，進行投資。此外，因為鄰近區域的外國與本地的廠商聚落，可能會影響新進外國廠商及新進本地廠商的區域選擇決策，因此本章節亦加入了空間變數進行分析。研究結果顯示，新進外國廠商與本地新進廠商，皆偏好在外國廠商聚集的區域進行投資，且對於本地廠商聚集的區域存在負向偏好的效果。另一方面，一個區域若存在越多的外國廠商(本地廠商)聚集，則對於新進本土廠商進駐該鄰近區域，產生正向偏好的互補(負向偏好的替代)效果。
在章節三中，同前篇章節的時空背景下，評估整體越南製造業的總生產力變化。由於資料的允許，本章節使用2000至2008年的廠商越南普查資料，並利用總生產力成長的變數拆解進行分析。實證結果顯示，在2000至2008年間，越南的平均總生產力上升6.80%，其中以資源配置的進步貢獻最大，反映了越南仍處在經濟發展的資源紅利階段；而在技術變化上，貢獻平均整體生產力約2.2%，占平均總生產力成長三分之一的水準。此外若把廠商分類為外國、本地與國有廠商進行分析，研究結果顯示，在技術相對成熟的外商及規模龐大的國有廠商對比之下，本地廠商的總生產力與技術成長最為緩慢。文中最後以省分做區分進行分析，發現越南的生產力成長，集中在特定區域，而這些不均的區域發展可能會導致省份間所得的失衡。
最後，章節四探討中國、越南、印尼的動態生產率差距，是否存在追趕的效應。本章節使用2000-2007年中國、越南及印尼的電子與紡織廠商資料，進行分析。實證結果顯示，在共同的稟賦邊界下，印尼的紡織及電子業相較於中國，其技術效率的進步相對落後；同樣地，越南的紡織及電子業相較於中國，其技術效率的進步，也呈現相對落後的狀況。由於中國積極的加入亞洲市場及投入更多的研發，以至於印尼與越南在追趕中國上顯得顢頇吃力，從而加大了對中國技術效率追趕的差距。在文中最後亦作了迴歸分析，結果發現外國廠商的聚集，對於幫助該區域廠商在追趕中國生產力上，存在不確定的效果，但高生產力的廠商聚落，對於幫助該區域廠商在追趕中國生產力上，呈現正向的效果。
;This dissertation exploits comprehensive level datasets across two Southeast Asian countries (Indonesia and Vietnam) and China to analyze three issues regarding foreign direct investment (FDI) and other related economic issues. We aim to clarify these issues as follows: (1) Birds of a Feather Flock Together? The location Choice of Multinational and Local Firms in Vietnam; (2) Aggregate Productivity Growth analysis in Vietnam after Ownership Deregulation; (3) A Meta-frontier Approach: Technological Catching-up between ASEAN members and China.
In first essay, we use the General Statistical Office (GSO) data from 2000 to 2005 in Vietnam, analyzing whether foreign and local newcomers are clustering when selecting entry location. That is, foreign newcomers (local newcomers), choose more existing foreign (local) firms in an area to invest. Furthermore, considering the clusters of foreign and local firms in neighboring areas may influence the regional selection of new entrants, this chapter also analyzes the location choice with spatial aspect. The empirical results show that both foreign and local entrants prefer to invest in a region where the more foreign firms are located, and a cluster of local firms decrease the likelihood of both foreign and local entrants to set up plants in that province. On the other hand, the more existing foreign firms (local firms) in a given region may have a positively complementary (negatively competitive) effect on local entrants’ entering in their neighboring areas.
The second essay applies the aggregate productivity growth (APG) approach against the background of the preceding essay. As the data permits, we use Vietnam’s firm-level dataset from 2000 to 2008 to analyze APG. The empirical results show that the average APG in Vietnam rose by 6.80% with the largest contribution to the reallocation of resources between 2000 and 2008, which indicated Vietnam is still in the development stage of resource dividend. In terms of technical efficiency, its modest growth contributed an average APG of 2.2%, accounting for about a third of the average growth rate. In addition, if the data was classified as foreign, local and state-owned manufacturing, the results show that local firms′ APG and technological growth are the lowest compared to foreign and state firms. In the final part of the chapter, by distinguishing dataset into provinces, it is found that Vietnam′s APG concentrated in specific areas and these inequalities may lead to imbalanced distribution of outcome between provinces.
The final essay explores the dynamic productivity gap between China, Vietnam and Indonesia to check whether there does catch-up exist. This essay uses China, Vietnam and Indonesia’s firm-level dataset from 2000 to 2007 for analysis. The empirical results show that, under the common resource boundary, Indonesia′s textile and electronics’ technical efficiency are relative behind China; similarly, Vietnam textile and electronics’ technical efficiency also showed relatively backward results. As China actively joined the Asian market and devoted more R&D, which widened the gap of productivity to catch up with China, reflecting that Indonesia and Vietnam were struggling to catch up with China. In the final of the chapter, we also made a regression analysis. The regression results found that there are uncertain effects on the cluster of foreign firms to help firms catch up with China′s productivity, and the cluster of essential high-efficiency firms in the same region has positive effect to help firms to catch up with China′s productivity. |
